Falkland Islanders Vote To Remain British

[transam]

I agree with Jingthing that the Falklands with eventually become the Malvinas - it'll just take time.

To answer Transam about India there is the rather messy unsorted problem in Kashmir.

So you, too, are anti democracy?

No but I don't regard the referendum in the Falklands/Malvinas as democratic - more of a farcial exercise in political one-upmanship.

Then you have a thought problem OR are an Argie.

[doggie888888]

They are all of British stock so what could you expect? A colonial outpost settled by British ,people who wish to

remain British. Is anyone surprised?

Yup, wait till China has sent enough han Chinese to Tibet. Then, when Tibet holds a referendum and all the majority han Chinese there vote to stay with China, see the outcry by Britain.

At least Tibet is vaguely in the neighbourhood, whereas the Falklands is as far away as you can be from Britain.

Ditto Indonesia and west Papua.

Edited March 17, 2013 by doggie888888

[Mossfinn]

Mossfinn, I now see your point; other than an opportunity for some Brit bashing, you seem to be saying that because the UK has a chequered past, and I will be the first to admit to that, and is a former colonial power that the residents of the Falklands should be forced to submit to Argentinian rule!

Do I understand now, that you accept you got this post hopelessly wrong!!

[Mossfinn]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

Of course they got it with the full agreement and cooperation of the British Gov't, after they had either reaped the countries of there natural resources, or had been forced to the negotiation table through acts of rejection.

[Mossfinn]

M

Your mentioning Britain's nuclear submarines being used by Callaghan to 'scare off' the Argentinians is somewhat ironic considering the furore kicked up by the trendy lefties when one of those same submarines sunk the Belgrano!

Where's the irony? Callaghan used mind games, by stating submarines were in the area, hence no invasion.

The Conqueror sank a second world war cruiser outside of a British declared exclusion zone and sailing away from it!! If I was the Commander in charge, so would I have done.

The declaration of an exclusion zone was more for the benefit of non-combatant shipping. Hostile shipping, especially the heavily armed flagship of the enemy fleet, can expect no quarter in or out of the exclusion zone; war had, after all, been declared.

The direction that the enemy vessel is pointing in is also quite irrelevant. The people who made a fuss about that may as well have made a fuss about all the aircraft that were shot down from behind during the first and second world wars.

The level of cognitive dissonance it must have taken to not understand this is quite staggering.

You did read my post in full I hope?

[khunken]

Do you also consider the democratic desire of the majority of the population in Northern ireland to remain part of the UK to be 'brainwashing?'

Are all those who disagree with your ignorant (as in ignoring those facts you don't care for) view of history and anti democratic opinions 'brainwashed?'

To answer your last arrogant question first, my opinion is that you and too many other posters on this thread are maintaining a 'we still have an Empire' view that is nothing like democracy.

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

As far as N Ireland is concerned the question of whether the decision of local Ulstermen & women or the whole country is the right one is still not answered. And yes, the Protestant population of N Ireland have been brainwashed to fear a Catholic-ruled country. This is changing with the fear of the Catholic church having been diminished - in the South as well.

Edited March 17, 2013 by khunken

[Scott]

Many off-topic posts and replies deleted. Continued off-topic, baiting posts will result in suspensions.

[transam]

I am not Brit bashing, just giving an alternative view on other countries rights to self determination, and Britain's downright refusal to allow it, until they were forced to do so.

A warped one.

If you'd read your history correctly then you would know that the majority of former British colonies gained their independence peacefully and with the full agreement and help of the British government at the time.

Of course they got it with the full agreement and cooperation of the British Gov't, after they had either reaped the countries of there natural resources, or had been forced to the negotiation table through acts of rejection.

, Tell me, what country do you come from and where do you live now. ?

Sorry mod, seems we have crossed paths but my question l feel is valid regarding previous posts.

Edited March 17, 2013 by transam

[Chicog]

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

Sorry, what were you saying about arrogance?

This is breathtakingly so.

There is no benefit in handing over your home to a bunch of corrupt South American politicos.

[khunken]

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

Sorry, what were you saying about arrogance?

This is breathtakingly so.

There is no benefit in handing over your home to a bunch of corrupt South American politicos.

Oh, another arrogant one. The benefit is in the future (which you would see if you bothered to read previous posts). Currently they want to stay under a bunch of corrupt (on a higher scale) European pollies.

[transam]

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

Sorry, what were you saying about arrogance?

This is breathtakingly so.

There is no benefit in handing over your home to a bunch of corrupt South American politicos.

Oh, another arrogant one. The benefit is in the future (which you would see if you bothered to read previous posts). Currently they want to stay under a bunch of corrupt (on a higher scale) European pollies.

You are European.

[Mossfinn]

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

Sorry, what were you saying about arrogance?

This is breathtakingly so.

There is no benefit in handing over your home to a bunch of corrupt South American politicos.

As stated numerously before, self determination is the key here, but as for handing over to corrupt South Americans, as opposed to staying with corrupt Western politicos

The Falklanders should get their people together and start negotiating with the highest bidders regarding future mineral rights, get the deals signed, become very rich, have another vote, sign the island over to the Penguins and live a very happy life wherever they want.

[endure]

Ok that's enough of the insults. Be civil or go elsewhere

[transam]

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

Sorry, what were you saying about arrogance?

This is breathtakingly so.

There is no benefit in handing over your home to a bunch of corrupt South American politicos.

As stated numerously before, self determination is the key here, but as for handing over to corrupt South Americans, as opposed to staying with corrupt Western politicos

The Falklanders should get their people together and start negotiating with the highest bidders regarding future mineral rights, get the deals signed, become very rich, have another vote, sign the island over to the Penguins and live a very happy life wherever they want.

Think they are living a happy life under an umbrella. Where would you suggest they move too. ?

[khunken]

transam, on 17 Mar 2013 - 19:44, said:

khunken, on 17 Mar 2013 - 19:41, said:

Chicog, on 17 Mar 2013 - 19:32, said:

khunken, on 17 Mar 2013 - 19:24, said:

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

Sorry, what were you saying about arrogance?

This is breathtakingly so.

There is no benefit in handing over your home to a bunch of corrupt South American politicos.

Oh, another arrogant one. The benefit is in the future (which you would see if you bothered to read previous posts). Currently they want to stay under a bunch of corrupt (on a higher scale) European pollies.

You are European.

Yes and also a citizen of the world. Europeans have no right to accuse South Americans of being any more corrupt than themselves - politically speaking. Most of my posts are on a political level & they do not reflect my views on individuals of the EU or anywhere else.

Edited March 17, 2013 by khunken

[transam]

Well it just seems as you are a European that you run down that stuff and you know that Argie stuff will be better. Perhaps you can enlighten us on your knowledge.

[bigbamboo]

I would have thought the Falkland Islanders have made it perfectly clear what they want regardless of what the British, Argentine or American governments say.

They wish to retain the status quo and that means under British protection.

And never fear, the Americans will support the British as they have in the past........ eventually.

[khunken]

Well it just seems as you are a European that you run down that stuff and you know that Argie stuff will be better. Perhaps you can enlighten us on your knowledge.

See my edited last post.

Given that Argentina is a democracy, only several hundred kms from the islands, the islanders can benefit from easier & faster agreements on minerals, oil & gas found in the locale, allow some tourism, easier communications - both by air & sea, open their minds to another language, join football & cricket leagues (yes they play cricket in Argentina) - all the time with an agreement on continuing partial self-government.

I don't profess to be an expert on the benefits, but the above is just from the top of my head. A little more research would very likely turn up even more benefits.

[endure]

Off topic posts have been deleted. The subject is the Falklander's vote to remain British.

[Mossfinn]

As this has degenerated and questions are being arbitrarily answered and others being responded to in a limited manner, with spikked responses and on the basis I have had my fun.......................

Mossfinn bugging out

Good Luck to all on St Patrick's Day

[khunken]

I'm off too & can echo Mossfinn's sign-off.

[MAJIC]

I agree with Jingthing that the Falklands with eventually become the Malvinas - it'll just take time.

To answer Transam about India there is the rather messy unsorted problem in Kashmir.

So you, too, are anti democracy?

No but I don't regard the referendum in the Falklands/Malvinas as democratic - more of a farcial exercise in political one-upmanship.

The Falklanders were not enticed or forced to vote in any way by the British Government,the Referendum was organised by the people,and for the people. How Democratic do you want it? I'm sure you will say "include the Argentinians" why should they be included? they do not qualify,just because they want a claim to the oil and mineral rights,end of story!

Ask Galtieri for his Dictatership views,who was last reported as living in poverty,on the streets of Buenos Aires.

Edited for spelling by MAJIC

Edited March 17, 2013 by MAJIC

[flipflop99]

With brainwashing, I was referring to the patently anti-Argentinian propaganda put out by the UK and the people of the Falklands/Malvinas will, in the future, see the stupidity of their action and accept that the islands would actually benefit by being Argentinian rather than British.

Sorry, what were you saying about arrogance?

This is breathtakingly so.

There is no benefit in handing over your home to a bunch of corrupt South American politicos.

Oh, another arrogant one. The benefit is in the future (which you would see if you bothered to read previous posts). Currently they want to stay under a bunch of corrupt (on a higher scale) European pollies.

I am afraid as much as you may hate it, the locals have made their feelings

clear. They were given the choice. I suspect recent history (an unprovoked

invasion) may have coloured their views somewhat. Given that, I would be

surprised if "patently anti-Argentinian propaganda" (if that was what

it was) was anything other than the

icing on the cake.

It`s very disappointing that right of self-determination is a not one you can

support. Maybe because the result of the referendum (where self-determination

desired has been given expression) did not fit in with your world view and what

the Falkland Islanders should have decided "for their own good". I am

always suspicious of those challenging the democratic process when the

"obviously wrong” decision has been made by others. It smells like a superiority

complex of one kind or another.

Also, let’s remember, the people that voted are a lot closer to issue than any of us

rather uselessly pontificating here.

Finally, I think you were trolling, and I don’t know why I gave into the temptation to

reply.

Edited March 17, 2013 by flipflop99

[7by7]

I can understand that some posters are ignorant of historical facts; not their fault if their education in this respect was deficient.

What I simply cannot understand is why certain posters cannot grasp the simple fact that the most important point is the will of the people living on the Islands.

They have voted to maintain the status quo.

Certain posters do not accept this and so use terms such as irrelevant, PR stunt, brainwashing etc., and in one case a breathtaking insult to all the people of Northern Ireland, to back up their (non)arguments

The only conclusion one can draw is that these people do not believe in real democracy, they only believe in it when the vote goes the way they want it to.

The historical facts have been repeated several times in this topic and everyone here has access to the internet so can check them or bring their own to the table. So ignorance of these facts is not a real excuse anymore. Unless one ignores those facts which don't fit one's arguments, the British case is the strongest.

So, historically the British case is strongest.

The wishes of the Islanders means that morally, the British case is the strongest.

Those who maintain that those who agree with this are somehow clinging on to the remnants of Empire merely show that they do not have any real arguments against these two facts.

Give it up; you and the Argentinian government are wrong, and deep in your hearts you both know it.

[Jingthing]

No as I've already presented, BOTH sides have strong cases. Any outside objective observer can see that. The British biased version of history is merely that, a British biased version of history of no more value than the Argentinian biased version. This nauseating repetition of trash talk that people who see merit on BOTH sides being anti-democracy has nothing to do with the issue and is merely about cheap character assassination. Just how many times is it really necessary to attack posters who have any sympathy for the Argentinian side as being anti-democratic? I get it. You think you've hit a home run with that but the islanders vote is just one of a NUMBER of factors to consider in any fair analysis of which country really deserves to have those islands.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[Chicog]

No as I've already presented, BOTH sides have strong cases. Any outside objective observer can see that. The British biased version of history is merely that, a British biased version of history of no more value than the Argentinian biased version. This nauseating repetition of trash talk that people who see merit on BOTH sides being anti-democracy has nothing to do with the issue and is merely about cheap character assassination. Just how many times is it really necessary to attack posters who have any sympathy for the Argentinian side as being anti-democratic? I get it. You think you've hit a home run with that but the islanders vote is just one of a NUMBER of factors to consider in any fair analysis of which country really deserves to have those islands.

I haven't seen you present a strong case for Argentinian ownership. They have no legal case. They have no moral case. And they've frequently cocked a snook at the interests of Falkland Islanders. What other one is there?

[Jingthing]

I haven't seen you present a strong case for Argentinian ownership. They have no legal case. They have no moral case. And they've frequently cocked a snook at the interests of Falkland Islanders. What other one is there?

I presented it in a link. It's not my fault if you didn't read it. I am not actually takings sides. I am saying both sides have merit and therefore they should negotiate. I do think in the long run Argentina will win, but it is not yet the long run.

Just because the more popular position on this forum is that the British side is completely right doesn't actually mean that is the truth.

Edited March 18, 2013 by Jingthing

[Chicog]

I haven't seen you present a strong case for Argentinian ownership. They have no legal case. They have no moral case. And they've frequently cocked a snook at the interests of Falkland Islanders. What other one is there?

I presented it in a link. It's not my fault if you didn't read it. I am not actually takings sides. I am saying both sides have merit and therefore they should negotiate. I do think in the long run Argentina will win, but it is not yet the long run.

Just because the more popular position on this forum is that the British side is completely right doesn't actually mean that is the truth.

Just because you keep repeating that Argentina has a valid claim doesn't make it true, either.

[Jingthing]

Just because you keep repeating that Argentina has a valid claim doesn't make it true, either.

The vast majority of Argentinians agree the claim is valid so objectively "valid" or not it isn't a demand that will easily go away ... ever.

[7by7]

Jingthing, you now say that you are not taking sides, that both sides have merit, but:-

You previously repeatedly posted the Argentinian government's view that the vote of the islanders is an irrelevant PR stunt (or words to that effect).

Please explain how that is not taking sides, how that is seeing merit in the islanders' case.

Please explain how ignoring the will of the inhabitants is democratic.

You call the facts a British biased version of history. Yet you have not presented any evidence to show where those historical facts are biased and incorrect

Will you take this opportunity to do so?